Value generalization in human avoidance learning

  1. Agnes Norbury  Is a corresponding author
  2. Trevor W Robbins
  3. Ben Seymour
  1. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom

Abstract

Generalization during aversive decision-making allows us to avoid a broad range of potential threats following experience with a limited set of exemplars. However, over-generalization, resulting in excessive and inappropriate avoidance, has been implicated in a variety of psychological disorders. Here, we use reinforcement learning modelling to dissect out different contributions to the generalization of instrumental avoidance in two groups of human volunteers (N=26, N=482). We found that generalization of avoidance could be parsed into perceptual and value-based processes, and further, that value-based generalization could be subdivided into that relating to aversive and neutral feedback − with corresponding circuits including primary sensory cortex, anterior insula, amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Further, generalization from aversive, but not neutral, feedback was associated with self-reported anxiety and intrusive thoughts. These results reveal a set of distinct mechanisms that mediate generalization in avoidance learning, and show how specific individual differences within them can yield anxiety.

Data availability

All relevant code for stimulus generation, data collection, and data analysis, in addition to raw behavioural data, is available at the project's Open Science Framework page (osf.io/25t3f). Raw functional imaging data is deposited at openfMRI (openfmri.org/dataset/ds000249) and derived statistical maps are available at NeuroVault (neurovault.org/collections/3177).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Agnes Norbury

    Computational and Biological Learning Laboratory, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    aen31@cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4377-3164
  2. Trevor W Robbins

    Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ben Seymour

    Computational and Biological Learning Laboratory, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1724-5832

Funding

Wellcome (097490/Z/11/A)

  • Ben Seymour

Wellcome (104631/Z/14/Z)

  • Trevor W Robbins

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Daeyeol Lee, Yale School of Medicine, United States

Ethics

Human subjects: Written, informed consent was obtained from all study volunteers. Both studies were approved by the University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee (PRE.2015.101; PRE.2016.061).

Version history

  1. Received: January 3, 2018
  2. Accepted: April 26, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 8, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: May 17, 2018 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2018, Norbury et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 6,559
    views
  • 499
    downloads
  • 31
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Agnes Norbury
  2. Trevor W Robbins
  3. Ben Seymour
(2018)
Value generalization in human avoidance learning
eLife 7:e34779.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.34779

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.34779

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Vezha Boboeva, Alberto Pezzotta ... Athena Akrami
    Research Article

    The central tendency bias, or contraction bias, is a phenomenon where the judgment of the magnitude of items held in working memory appears to be biased toward the average of past observations. It is assumed to be an optimal strategy by the brain and commonly thought of as an expression of the brain’s ability to learn the statistical structure of sensory input. On the other hand, recency biases such as serial dependence are also commonly observed and are thought to reflect the content of working memory. Recent results from an auditory delayed comparison task in rats suggest that both biases may be more related than previously thought: when the posterior parietal cortex (PPC) was silenced, both short-term and contraction biases were reduced. By proposing a model of the circuit that may be involved in generating the behavior, we show that a volatile working memory content susceptible to shifting to the past sensory experience – producing short-term sensory history biases – naturally leads to contraction bias. The errors, occurring at the level of individual trials, are sampled from the full distribution of the stimuli and are not due to a gradual shift of the memory toward the sensory distribution’s mean. Our results are consistent with a broad set of behavioral findings and provide predictions of performance across different stimulus distributions and timings, delay intervals, as well as neuronal dynamics in putative working memory areas. Finally, we validate our model by performing a set of human psychophysics experiments of an auditory parametric working memory task.

    1. Neuroscience
    Michael Berger, Michèle Fraatz ... Henrike Scholz
    Research Article

    The brain regulates food intake in response to internal energy demands and food availability. However, can internal energy storage influence the type of memory that is formed? We show that the duration of starvation determines whether Drosophila melanogaster forms appetitive short-term or longer-lasting intermediate memories. The internal glycogen storage in the muscles and adipose tissue influences how intensely sucrose-associated information is stored. Insulin-like signaling in octopaminergic reward neurons integrates internal energy storage into memory formation. Octopamine, in turn, suppresses the formation of long-term memory. Octopamine is not required for short-term memory because octopamine-deficient mutants can form appetitive short-term memory for sucrose and to other nutrients depending on the internal energy status. The reduced positive reinforcing effect of sucrose at high internal glycogen levels, combined with the increased stability of food-related memories due to prolonged periods of starvation, could lead to increased food intake.